Sensors 2012, 12, 732-752; doi:10.3390/s120100732

sensors ISSN 1424-8220

www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors Review

The Evolution of the Bacterial Luciferase Gene Cassette (lux) as a Real-Time Bioreporter

Dan Close 1, Tingting Xu 2, Abby Smartt 2, Alexandra Rogers 2, Robert Crossley 2, Sarah Price 2, Steven Ripp 2 and Gary Sayler 1,2,*

1 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, The Joint Institute for Biological Sciences, 676 Dabney Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA; E-Mail: dclose@utk.edu

2 The Center for Environmental Biotechnology,The University of Tennessee, 676 Dabney Hall, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA; E-Mails: txu2@utk.edu (T.X.); asmartt@utk.edu (A.S.); aroger24@utk.edu (A.R.); rcrossl1@utk.edu (R.C.); sprice12@utk.edu (S.P.); saripp@utk.edu (S.R.)

* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: sayler@utk.edu; Tel.: +1-865-974-8080; Fax: +1-865-974-8086.

Received: 26 November 2011; in revised form: 30 December 2011 / Accepted: 9 January 2012 / Published: 11 January 2012

Abstract: The bacterial luciferase gene cassette (lux) is unique among bioluminescent bioreporter systems due to its ability to synthesize and/or scavenge all of the substrate compounds required for its production of light. As a result, the lux system has the unique ability to autonomously produce a luminescent signal, either continuously or in response to the presence of a specific trigger, across a wide array of organismal hosts. While originally employed extensively as a bacterial bioreporter system for the detection of specific chemical signals in environmental samples, the use of lux as a bioreporter technology has continuously expanded over the last 30 years to include expression in eukaryotic cells such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae and even human cell lines as well. Under these conditions, the lux system has been developed for use as a biomedical detection tool for toxicity screening and visualization of tumors in small animal models. As the technologies for lux signal detection continue to improve, it is poised to become one of the first fully implantable detection systems for intra-organismal optical detection through direct marriage to an implantable photon-detecting digital chip. This review presents the basic biochemical background that allows the lux system to continuously autobioluminesce and highlights the important milestones in the use of lux-based bioreporters as they have evolved from chemical detection platforms in prokaryotic bacteria to rodent-based tumorigenesis study targets. In addition, the future of lux imaging using integrated circuit

OPEN ACCESS

Sensors 2012, 12 733

microluminometry to image directly within a living host in real-time will be introduced and its role in the development of dose/response therapeutic systems will be highlighted.

Keywords: mammalian cells; bacterial luciferase (lux); bioreporter; biosensor; cell culture; small animal models

1. Introduction

Bacterial bioluminescence, commonly known as the lux reaction, is the most widely distributed luminescent mechanism on the planet [1] and, although this process of bacterial light production has been observed for centuries, it was not until the mid 1900s that it began to be evaluated scientifically [2,3]. Beginning in the 1980s, after several decades of research, the understanding of this system became advanced enough that it was possible to exogenously express the full gene cassette, comprised of five genes (luxCDABE), in alternative host organisms such as Escherichia coli [4]. As researcher’s understanding of the biochemistry behind the lux reaction continued to be refined, and genetic manipulation techniques improved, it soon became possible to exploit this cassette as a reporter system across a wide variety of bacterial species for an extremely diverse set of monitoring objectives.

Following the success of these myriad lux-based bacterial bioreporters, attempts were made to incorporate the system into eukaryotic organisms in order to expand the lux system’s usefulness as a reporter. While initially expression of the bacterial genes was unsuccessful, through rearrangement of the lux cassette gene expression pattern and improvement of expression efficiency via codon-optimization and the addition of specialized linker regions, these hurdles were overcome and the lux reaction was demonstrated to occur in the lower eukaryote Saccharomyces cerevisiae [5]. Building upon this early success of eukaryotic expression, the luxAB genes were then further engineered to express in a human cell line, leading to the emergence of the lux system as a truly multifunctional reporter system similar to the more commonly employed firefly luciferase system [6].

Recently the lux system has undergone another substantial improvement, as it has been demonstrated that the full cassette can be optimized in a similar manner to the luxAB genes in order to promote fully autonomous bioluminescent production in a human cell line without the need to exogenously supplement a chemical substrate [7]. This review will highlight the development of the lux cassette from a curiosity observed in marine bacteria, through its extensive use as a bacterial bioreporter system and modification for expression in eukaryotic organisms, up to its recent demonstration as the only fully autonomous, substrate-free bioluminescent reporter system available in the eukaryotic host background. The unique, autonomous nature of the lux cassette will also be reviewed in light of the development of advanced photon detection hardware, detailing the future directions of lux development and its potential for biomedical as well as basic research applications.

Wild-Type lux Background

One does not have to look very far to see the glow of naturally bioluminescent organisms. On land bioluminescence is most commonly observed in the glow of fungi growing on decaying wood or from

Sensors 2012, 12 734

insects displaying their luminescent signal after dusk, while in marine environments bioluminescence is most commonly observed in single celled bacteria that are found either living freely or in symbiosis with larger hosts. It is these bioluminescent bacteria that are the most abundant and widely distributed of the light emitting organisms on Earth and they can be found in both aquatic (freshwater and marine) and terrestrial environments. Despite the widespread prevalence of bacterial bioluminescence, however, the majority of these organisms are classified into just three genera: Vibrio, Photobacterium, and Photorhabdus (Xenorhabdus) [1]. Although they are viable as free-living bacteria, these organisms are most commonly observed in symbiosis with a larger host. There is still no consensus as to the evolutionary benefit of bioluminescent production, however, in general it is theorized that the production of light can aid in the consumption of free living bacteria by higher trophic organisms, transferring them to a more controlled, nutrient rich habitat inside the host, or that, likewise, symbiotic bacteria can aid their hosts through the production of light that attracts prey, aids in camouflage, or attracts mates, in return for the shelter and nutrients provided by living within the body of the host organism [8]. Regardless of the reasons, the genetic system employed for the generation of bioluminescence is well conserved across all known bioluminescent bacteria. The luciferase protein is a heterodimer formed by the luxA and luxB gene products. The luxC, luxD, and luxE gene products encode for a reductase, transferase, and synthase respectively, that work together in a single complex to generate an aldehyde substrate for the bioluminescent reaction. In some species, there is an additional gene, frp, that functions as a flavin reductase to aid in the regeneration of the required FMNH2 substrate. Together with molecular oxygen, these components are all that are required to produce a bioluminescent signal [9] (Figure 1).

Figure 1. The luxCDABEfrp genes work synergistically with endogenous myristic acid, FMN, and O2 to generate a bioluminescent signal. The frp gene is not found in all organisms expressing the remaining lux genes. Originally published in and used with permission from [1].

In addition, some marine species have additional genes that govern the expression of the remainder of the operon. The luxI and luxR genes function as an autoinducer and transcriptional activator (Figure 2), allowing the bioluminescent bacteria to participate in quorum sensing, therefore producing

S

abm

2

2

orpsinwginra(inadinepabarmth

Sensors 201

a bioluminebe regulatedmetabolic en

Figuretranscrinteracexpresproduc

2. Bacterial

2.1. First Ex

Even beforganisms threporter becproteins. Wspecies to dnitial attem

were drivengenetic comnvestigation

recombinantaldehyde. InluxCDABE)ntroduced i

aldehyde supdemonstratinnterrogating

ease of detecpractical nona high signabacterial lucallowed thereal-time famanner, thehem attracti

2, 12

scent signad and only nergy.

e 2. In soriptional acct (RI), thssion of thection in thes

l lux-Based

xamples of T

fore the mehat naturallcause of th

Work therefodetermine i

mpts to isolan primarily mponents rns occurredt E. coli con less than), together into E. coli pplementating the univg the functioction, and nnexistence al-to-noise rciferase enze developmashion. In aese reporterive options

al only at hiexpressed

me speciesctivator (R) ey enhancee luxR gense organism

d Reporter

Transgenic

echanisms y express it

he facile deore quicklyf the modi

ate and exoby the des

responsible d in 1982 wontaining thn one year

with its [11], result

ion. This prversal natureons of the in

non-destructof in vivo bratio for thzyme allow

ment of bacaddition, bes can be emfor a large

igh populatwhen it is

s, an autoiis produce

e productione. This fe

ms.

Systems

lux Express

responsiblet, the lux syetection an began to ified organiogenously esire to unde

for bioluwhen Belas he Vibrio har following associated ting in the frocess was se of the opendividual lutive featuresbioluminesce recombin

ws for rapidcterial bioreecause the rmployed innumber of b

ion densitiebeneficial

inducer (I) ed by the luon of the edback sys

sion

e for biolumystem had gnd quantific

introduce tisms could xpress the

erstand the uminescence

et al. [4] darveyi luxA

this succeregulatory

first recombsoon repeateeron [12,13ux genes, ins the lux sys

cence from bnant lux repd light prodeporters tharesulting bi

n a high thrbiomonitori

es [10]. Thito the org

is produceuxR gene. WluxCDABE

stem serves

minescence gained attencation of vthe lux genacquire th

lux genes iorganizatio

e. The firdemonstrate

A and luxB essful demo

genes, wabinant strained using the]. Although

nvestigators stem offerebacteria notorter system

duction. Takat can be cioluminesceroughput ming applicat

is allows thanism, with

ed by the When theseE genes ans to regulat

were comntion in regaisible light

nes into nohe light-emiin non-nativon, regulatiorst major ed biolumingenes upononstration, as isolated n capable oe Photorhabh these effobegan to apd as a biolut expressingm and the fken togethecontinuouslence is emi

manner with tions.

he productiohout unduly

luxI gene e two compnd inhibit te biolumin

mpletely expards to its pt produced on-luminescitting phenove hosts sucon, and funadvanceme

nescent prodn addition o

the entire from V. f

of emitting lbdus lumineorts focusedppreciate th

uminescent rg the lux gefast turnoveer, these attly monitoreitted in an very low c

73

on of light ty consumin

and a ponents further

nescent

plored in thpotential as

by the Lucent bacteriotype. Thesch as E. conction of thent in thesduction fromof exogenou

lux cassettfischeri anlight withouescens gened primarily he sensitivityreporter. Th

enes provideer rate of thtributes haved in a nea

autonomoucost, makin

35

to ng

he a

ux al se oli he se m us te

nd ut

es, at y, he es he ve ar us ng

Sensors 2012, 12 736

2.2. Development of lux as a Method for Visualizing Gene Expression

The first use of lux as a biomonitoring technology came soon after its transgenic expression in E. coli, when Enbreghet et al. [14] fused the lux cassette to an inducible promoter that could be used to monitor gene expression in vivo. Using this experimental design it became possible to monitor autonomous bioluminescence as an indicator for the transcriptional activity of a promoter of interest. Using this method, the first major targets of study were the E. coli lac and ara promoters and it was discovered that upon IPTG or arabinose induction, light production in hosts expressing lux fusions increased between 600 to 1,000-fold. Following these reports the lux system was used to monitor regulation of the lateral flagella genes in Vibrio parahaemolyticus [14,15], providing its first demonstration in a previously uncharacterized system. These applications represented a significant shift in the way gene expression was investigated because, unlike traditional biochemical assays using enzymatic reporters, the bioluminescent signal from the lux genes could be easily detected and measured with high sensitivity without cell perturbation. This allowed the same sample to be continuously monitored, thus revealing the dynamics of gene expression through changes in bioluminescence over time. This new method was therefore capable of generating data that could not previously be generated.

2.3. lux-Based Bioluminescence as a Tool for Cellular Population Monitoring

While the Lux proteins do not require exogenous substrate addition, their function does require continued access to the molecular oxygen, FMNH2, and aldehyde co-substrates. For this reason, their bioluminescence can only be detected in actively growing cells. This knowledge, combined with the discovery that lux bioluminescent output is proportionally correlated to the number of cells present, has therefore been used as a simple, sensitive, and non-destructive means for in situ bacterial monitoring. This was first demonstrated by Shaw et al. [16] in 1986 when constitutively expressed V. fischeri luxCDABE genes were introduced into the phytopathogen Xanthomonas campestris, and their subsequent invasion of a cauliflower leaf was visualized. Similarly, de Weger and colleagues [17] were successfully able to detect luxCDABE-labeled Pseudomonas fluorescens in the rhizosphere of soybean roots using the same technique. Additionally, through the use of a lux-based system rather than an enzymatic reporter, it was possible for these researchers to achieve detection limits three orders of magnitude lower than what was previously possible, leading to improved signal detection. These early examples highlighted the application of lux-based bioluminescence as a rapid, simple and sensitive tool for in situ detection of living bacteria and established the foundation for future research using lux to monitor genetically engineered microorganisms. In perhaps the most notable use of the lux genes for tracking a cellular population, a P. fluorescens strain was transformed with the lux genes and used for the first bioremediation-related environmental field release of a genetically engineered microorganism in 1996.

This release was approved by the Environmental Protection Agency to determine the efficiency of bioremediation process monitoring through inoculation of the bioluminescent strain directly into contaminated soil and to determine its ability to monitor the bioremediation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [18]. By placing the lux genes under the control of promoters in the naphthalene

Sensors 2012, 12 737

degradation pathway, it was possible to monitor their bioluminescent output as a measure of naphthalene contamination in the soil [19]. Using a combination of bioluminescent and traditional culture based detection methods, the release area was monitored for two years after the release of bioluminescent P. fluorescens. Over this time, regular sampling was performed to track the amount of bacteria present in the soil, as well as the amount of bioluminescence produced, which were indicative of organism presence and naphthalene degradation, respectively (Figure 3). Based on culture detection methods, the bioluminescent P. fluorescens persisted in both contaminated and non-contaminated soils, decaying at similar rates and producing similar colony counts [18]. The long term nature and difficulty in remote monitoring of bacterial populations presented in this study illustrates how the unique properties of the lux operon can provide it with an advantage over its substrate requiring bioluminescent or UV stimulation requiring fluorescent counterparts. Because of its autonomous nature, the lux-tagged P. fluorescens could be continually surveyed for bioluminescent production, without the need for repeated stimulation to induce a reporter signal.

Figure 3. Using bioluminescent bacteria, Ripp et al. were able to track both the presence of the genetically modified organisms as well as the their effectiveness in degrading naphthalene over time. Naphthalene concentrations are shown in ppm. Adapted and used with permission from [18].

2.4. The Use of lux for Exogenous Target Detection

Following the work that demonstrated how the lux cassette could be used as a tool for visualizing gene expression, it soon became clear that these genes could be adapted for use as a traditional bioreporter target through activation under specific, predetermined conditions as well. By expressing the lux cassette under the control of a promoter with a known inducer, the resultant bioluminescent emission could be used as an indicator for the presence of the given stimulus, and fluctuation of the bioluminescent signal could be interpreted as changes in the bioavailable concentration of the inducer compound. Building upon these ideas, the first use of bioluminescence for monitoring metabolic

Sensors 2012, 12 738

activity was demonstrated in Pseudomonas putida by Burlage et al. in 1990 [20]. Here, naphthalene degradation was monitored using a transcriptional fusion of the salicylate inducible nah promoter and the luxCDABE genes. Salicylate is an intermediate metabolite of naphthalene, which is eventually degraded to acetaldehyde and pyruvate in Pseudomonas. Therefore, naphthalene degradation could be correlated to the light emission upon induction with naphthalene-derived salicylate. The nondestructive nature of the lux system allowed for this analysis to occur in real time in a growing culture, providing continuous monitoring of naphthalene metabolism across various stages of growth. It was later determined by King et al. [19] that the bioluminescent signal was controlled in a dose/response fashion (Figure 4), therefore demonstrating its usefulness in determining contaminant levels in mixed environmental samples. This opened the door for a multitude of environmental bioreporters featuring lux, such as that developed by Applegate and colleagues that was used to monitor for water soluble benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX) compounds indicative of petroleum spills. This reporter, constructed by linking expression of the lux cassette to the toluene dioxygenase promoter, was capable of detecting as little as 30 µg of toluene/L in as quickly as 2 h and maintained its detection ability for over 100 generations without antibiotic selection [21].

Figure 4. By treating with naphthalene over 8 h intervals (black boxes), King et al. were able to demonstrate a corresponding dose/response bioluminescent production ( ) curve. Adapted and used with permission from [19].

Another common target for lux-based environmental sensing has been phenol. Notably, Abd-El-Haleem et al. [22] constructed one of the first lux-based phenol biosensors by inserting a mopR-like promoter fused to the V. fischeri lux cassette genes into Acinetobacter sp DF4. This reporter was capable of demonstrating a lower detection limit of 2.5 ppm in 4 h when exposed to phenol, and was only responsive to three of the ten phenol derivatives tested, suggesting that it was relatively specific as well. This is, however, not by any means the only lux-based phenol reporter to be developed. Davidov et al. [23] made extensive use of recA promoters fused to lux cassettes, with each of the reporters containing a slight variation in its promoter sequence, that were expressed either in E. coli or Salmonella typhimurium and using lux genes from either V. fischeri or P. luminescens. The most sensitive of these reporters was that expressing the V. fischeri lux genes in E. coli, which was capable of detecting 0.008 mg phenol/L in 2 h. This same construct, when expressed in S. typhimurium was also capable of detecting phenol in 2 h but required a minimum concentration of 16 mg phenol/L, demonstrating the differences in host phenol bioavailability.

Time (h) Bioluminescen

ce (µA)

Sensors 2012, 12 739

2.5. Further Uses of lux as a Bacterial Bioreporter

As the popularity of the lux system has grown over the years, an increasing number of bacterial reporters have been leveraged for the detection of a wide variety of contaminants. While this review focuses only on the seminal examples of lux’s growth as a reporter system, a larger list of target compounds and detection limits of various bioreporters can be found in recent reviews [24,25] and Table 1.

Table 1. A representative listing of luxCDABE-based bioreporters.

Analyte Time for induction Concentration Reference2,3 Dichlorophenol 2 h 50 mg/L [23] 2,4,6 Trichlorophenol 2 h 10 mg/L [23] 2,4-D 20–60 min 0.44 mg/L [26,27] 3-Xylene Hours 3 μM [28] 4-Chlorobenzoate 1 h 380 μM–6.5 mM [29] 4-Nitrophenol 2 h 0.25 mg/L [23] Alginate production 1 h 50–150 mM NaCl [30] Ammonia 30 min 20 μM [31] Androgenic chemicals 3–4 h 10−9–10−10 M [32] Antibiotic effectiveness

against Staphylococcus aureus infections in mice

4 h 100 CFU [33]

Antimony (antimonate and antimonite)

3–4 h 0.1 mg/L [34]

Arsenic 3–4 h 80 µg/L As(V); 8 µg/L As(III) [35] BTEX (benzene, toluene,

ethylbenzene, xylene) 1–4 h 0.03–50 mg/L [21]

Cadmium 4 h 19 mg/kg [36] Chlorodibromomethane 2 h 20 mg/L [23] Chloroform 2 h 300 mg/L [23] Chromate 1 h 10 μM [37] Cobalt 9 µM 2.0 mM [38] Copper 1 h 0.05 mg/L [39] Dichloromethane 1–2 h ~0.01 mg/L [40] DNA damage (cumene

hydroperoxide) 50 min 6.25 mg/mL [41]

DNA damage (mitomycin) 1 h Not specified

0.032 μg/mL 0.31 μg/mL

[42] [43]

DNA damage and other cell stressors/activators

A library of luxCDABE-based fusions with 689 E. coli gene promoters

[44]

Estrogenic chemicals 1 h 10−11 M [45] Gamma-irradiation 1.5 h 1.5–200 Gy [46]

Heat shock 20 min Various, depending on chemical inducer used

[47,48]

Heavy metals A multi-bioreporter panel for detecting and identifying multiple heavy metal contaminants in a single sample

[49]

Sensors 2012, 12 740

Table 1. Cont.

Analyte Time for induction Concentration ReferenceHemolysin production Not specified 5 mM cAMP [50] Hydrogen peroxide 20 min 0.1 mg/L [51] in vivo monitoring of

Salmonella typhimurium infections in living mice

4 h 100 CFU [52]

Iron Hours 10 nM–1 μM [53] Isopropyl benzene 1–4 h 1–100 μM [54] Lead 1 h 0.33 mg/L [39,55] Mercury 2 h 0.5 ng/L [56] N-acyl homoserine lactones (3-oxo-C6-HSL)

200 min 3 nM [57]

Naphthalene 8–24 min 12–120 μM [58] Nickel 4–6 h 0.1 µM [38,59] Nitrate ~1 h 1 mg/L [60] Organic peroxides 20 min Not specified [51] Oxidative stress Not specified 0.015 ppm (paraquat) [61] PCBs 1–3 h 0.8 μM [62] p-chlorobenzoic acid 40 min 0.06 g/L [29] p-cymene <30 min 60 ppb [63] Pentachlorophenol 2 h 0.008 mg/L [23] Phenol 2 h 16 mg/L [23] Salicylate 15 min 36 μM [58] Shiga toxin expression in E. coli Gene expression profiling in enterohemorrhagic E. coli [64] Tetracycline 40 min 5 ng/mL [65]

Toxicity monitoring Use of multi-bioreporter arrays to survey and identify multiple chemicals within single samples

[66,67]

Trichloroethylene 1–1.5 h 5–80 μM [68] Trinitrotoluene Not specified Not specified [69] Ultrasound 1 h 500 W/cm2 [70] Ultraviolet light (bacterial) 1 h 2.5–20 J/m2 [71] Ultraviolet light (yeast) 1 h 7 mJ/cm2 [72] Zinc 4 h 0.5–4 μM [73]

3. Eukaryotic Expression of the lux Cassette

Despite its success as a bacterial bioreporter, widespread use of the lux system faced a major hurdle in that it was initially believed to be capable of expression only in prokaryotes. Although several attempts were made to express the lux genes in eukaryotic hosts, none of these made significant headway [74–76]. It would not be until 2003 that the first major achievement was documented with the demonstration of autonomous bioluminescence from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae [5]. Following this breakthrough, the lux genes continued to be modified and improved for eukaryotic expression, later being developed into a reliable yeast-based bioassay tool and, eventually, becoming capable of expression in a human cell line [7], opening the door for continued development in the future.

Sensors 2012, 12 741

3.1. lux Expression in Yeast

It was the demonstration of lux function in S. cerevisiae by Gupta et al. [5] in 2003 that marked the first time a eukaryotic organism successfully produced levels of bioluminescence comparable to prokaryotic lux-based bioreporters (Figure 5). To achieve this, Gupta and colleagues chose to express the lux genes from the terrestrial bacterium P. luminescens rather than those from the traditional marine organisms V. harveyi or V. fischeri. This was done because the resulting luciferase proteins from P. luminescens exhibit a higher thermal stability than those of their marine counterparts. To mimic the organization and expression of the lux genes found in prokaryotic organisms, the luxA and luxB genes were expressed from a single promoter and linked by an internal ribosomal entry site (IRES). Under this expression strategy it was determined that bioluminescence was 20 times greater than that reported for fused luciferases upon exposure to an n-decanal substrate. Building upon these findings, the remainder of the lux genes were incorporated using the same strategy, with a pair of genes linked by an IRES element and driven by a unique promoter. When expressed concurrently this design was capable of producing an easily detectable bioluminescent signal.

Figure 5. Comparison of (A) S. cerevisiae and (B) E. coli expressing the luxCDABEfrp genes. Used with permission from [5].

Using the lessons learned from creation of the bioluminescent yeast strain, work was then begun to develop the eukaryotic lux system into a functional bioreporter for the detection of estrogenic compounds—a task that was not possible using prokaryotic hosts. Sanseverino et al. [45] built upon the lux plasmids developed by Gupta, creating a second set that constitutively expressed the luxC, luxD, luxE, and frp genes while regulating expression of the remaining luxA and luxB genes through insertion of human estrogen response elements (Figure 6). Upon exposure to estrogenic compounds, yeast expressing these regulated lux genes would produce a bioluminescent signal in as quickly as 1 h. This improved significantly over the colorimetric yeast estrogen screen, which could take as long as five days to produce results under identical conditions. Within two years of this successful demonstration of lux-based bioluminescent yeast as estrogen reporters, the same group had expanded

S

thapoJe

3

futhbisththfrc

fDtrPrpthhCaurimin

Sensors 201

he functionaccomplishepalindromicof estrogenicJust as befoexisting scre

Figureglycerunder only in

3.2. lux Expr

Continuinfurther refinhe lux syst

bioluminescs capable ohe only bioherefore pro

fluorescent, reporters sucellular back

Despite tfirst publishDespite the ransfect hu

Patterson et required optpreference. The probabil

human ribosCraney et aallowed forunlike the wreplacementmproved exncorporatio

2, 12

nality of theed by repl androgen rc and andro

ore, the lux-eening meth

e 6. Sansevraldehyde-3the control

n the presen

ression in M

ng the devened and optitem possescent reporterof producingluminescenoduce real-it is not su

uch as GFPkground. the potentiahed report osuccess ach

uman cells al. [6] wer

timization oThis optimiity that the some (Tabl

al. [79], whr improved work of Ct of the yeaxpression oon of these m

e assay by iacing the response el

ogenic comp-based systehods [32].

verino et al. -phosphate l of estroge

nce of estrog

Mammalian

elopment ofimized for eses some ur systems thg continuou

nt reporter av-time data iubject to thP [78]. The

al benefits oof human ophieved in ex

with the re the first of the DNAization servfull length le 2). Theso reported expression

raney et aast IRES sef the downmodificatio

incorporatinestrogen reements. Hopounds wheem was sho

placed the dehydroge

en response genic compo

Cells

f the lux syexpression iunique charhat are avaius bioluminvailable forin vivo [7,7he same higese traits m

of human cptimizationxpressing thsame consto demonst

A sequenceved to increaof the opene results mthat codon

n in GC-ricl., Patterso

equence witstream luxBns, Patterso

ng detectionesponse ele

owever, thisen combinedown to be m

alcohol dehenase prom

elements (ounds. Adap

ystem as a in human ceracteristics ilable for usnescence wir human cel77]. In addigh levels o

make it an

cell line expn until full che full lux ctructs and

trate that efe of each gease the effic

n reading framirrored tho

modificatioch bacteria n had to ith a mammB gene in thon et al. we

n of androgements thas simple chad with the emore effect

hydrogenasmoter (PGPD)

ERE) to prpted and use

functional ell lines. Thcompared

se in humanthout additil imaging thition, becauof backgrou

attractive o

pression, it cassette expcassette in S

produce afficient exprene to morciency of traame would bose demonston of the Asuch as S

include addmalian optim

he mammalere able to d

genic compoat controlleange allowexisting lux-

tive, faster,

se 1 promot) controllinrovide conded with perm

eukaryotic his process wto the alte

n cell lines. ion of an exhat can func

use it is biound produceoption for

would stillpression waS. cerevisiaa biolumineression of thre closely manscription/be recogniztrated in th

AT-rich P. Streptomyceditional momized IRES lian cellulardemonstrate

ounds as weed lux expred for paral-based estroand more

er (PADH1) ang luxA anditional expmission from

reporter sywas underta

ernative fluoBecause th

xogenous luction indepeoluminescened by someimaging in

l be five yeas finally ree, it was noescent signhe luxA and

match the h/translation zed and exprhe prokaryoluminescen

es coelicolodifications element to

r environmee constitutiv

74

ell. This waression witllel detectio

ogen reportespecific tha

and the d luxB ression

m [45].

ystem, it waaken becausorescent an

he lux systemuciferin, it endently, annt rather thae fluorescenn the huma

ears from theported [6,7ot possible tal. In 2005d luxB gene

human codoand increasressed by th

otic arena bs lux opero

or. Howevesuch as th

o provide foent. Throug

ve expressio

42

as th on er. an

as se nd m is

nd an nt an

he 7]. to 5, es on se he by on er, he or gh on

S

octo

ogeoceth

Sensors 201

of the lux lcassette ando firefly luc

Table (http://genes Used w

Gene luxA (wt) luxA (op) luxB (wt) luxB (op)

Followinoptimized fogenes to moelements, anoriginal concontaining telongation fhe control o

Figurecodonsimult

2, 12

luciferase hd creating a ciferase, onl

2. Transcr/genes.mit.ein a human

with permis

Type Be1 61 1 1

a Initiaion sig

g the inroaor expressioore closely mnd then divnstruct creathe luxC anfactor 1-α pof the cytom

e 7. For ex-optimized,taneously ex

heterodimersubstrate d

ly with addi

ription and edu) for exn host. Scossion from [

egin End61 1,081 1,081 9841 984

gnal; b Termin

ads made byon in humanmatch the hviding theirated by Pa

nd luxE genromoter and

megalovirus

xpression of, separated bxpressed wi

r, providingdependent luition of the

translation xpression ofore interpret[6].

d Length3 1,0233 1,083

4 9844 984nation; c Codin

y Pattersonn cell lines. human codor expressionatterson wa

nes (separated the luxD immediate

f the full luby IRES elithin the hos

g the frameux reporter sinexpensive

prediction f wild type tation: 0–50

h I a 45 66

51 66

ng region scor

n et al., it wThis was a

on preferencn across thras retaineded by an IRand frp genearly prom

ux cassette lements, andst. Adapted

ework for fsystem thate aldehyde n

scores from(wt) and o

0 weak, 50–

T b 42 42 38 41

re; d Probabilit

was not lonccomplishe

ce, separatinree sequenc

d, but co-eRES elemennes (also sep

moter (Figure

in a humand divided aand used w

future optimt could be un-decanal ra

m the GENoptimized (o–100 mode

CodRg c 791

1,910 585

1,952 ty of an exon;

ng before thed by re-engng them by ces in two expressed wnt) under thparated by ae 7).

n cell, all ocross two p

with permiss

mization of used in a maather than D

NSCAN algop) luxA anrate, >100

P d T0.7

0.88 0.97 0.99

; e Exon score

he full lux gineering eahuman optseparate pl

with a secohe control oan IRES ele

of the geneplasmids thasion from [7

74

f the full luanner similaD-luciferin.

gorithm nd luxB strong.

Translated e

67.01 181.78 46.37

185.60 .

cassette waach of the luimized IRElasmids. Thond plasmiof the humaement) unde

es were at were 7].

43

ux ar

e

as ux ES he id an er

Sensors 2012, 12 744

It is possible that this two plasmid expression system could itself contribute to the production of bioluminescence in human cells since Yagur-Kroll and Belkin [80] have recently reported that splitting the five lux genes into two smaller units (luxAB and luxCDE) resulted in improved bioreporter performance in E. coli. This increased bioluminescent production is hypothesized to be due to the associated enhanced transcriptional and/or translational efficiency achieved through the expression of smaller open reading frames, which theoretically could serve the same function in eukaryotic cells as well.

Using this expression strategy, it was demonstrated that these changes were both necessary and sufficient for autonomous production of a bioluminescent signal when expressed in a human kidney cell line (Figure 8) [7]. It should be noted that bioluminescent production from the human-optimized lux cassette was demonstrated to be several orders of magnitude lower than that of the more common firefly luciferase reporter and therefore greater numbers of bioluminescent cells were required to produce a significantly detectable signal in both cell culture (15,000 lux-expressing cells vs. 50 firefly luciferase-expressing cells) and small animal imaging experiments (25,000 lux-expressing cells vs. 2,500 firefly luciferase cells). However, due to the autonomous nature of the lux system, bioluminescent production was maintained over a longer period and produced less variability than did the firefly luciferase system [78].

Figure 8. The optimization process employed by Close et al. was both necessary and sufficient to induce bioluminescent production from a human cell line upon expression. Adapted and used with permission from [7].

In one interesting experiment that took advantage of the autonomous nature of lux bioluminescence, constitutively bioluminescent human cells expressing the lux genes were used to evaluate the cytotoxicity of the aldehyde n-decanal [77]—the same aldehyde that was used by Patterson et al. [6] to stimulate bioluminescent production in cell extracts containing optimized luxA and luxB genes. By monitoring the changes in bioluminescent production following aldehyde treatment, it was possible to evaluate not only which concentrations were cytotoxic to the cells, but also at what time following exposure the effects began to take place, how long the cells were able to continue functioning under a diminished capacity following introduction of the aldehyde, and at what point cells succumbed to treatment and died. It was demonstrated that treatment with 0.00001%, 0.0001%, and 0.001% volumes of aldehyde did not show any changes in bioluminescence [77], despite the fact that this compound has been shown previously to function as a substrate for the lux reaction [6]. However, while treatment with a 0.1% volume of aldehyde quickly diminished bioluminescent production, treatment with 0.01%

S

aodowit

4

dwbthFIpclusos

ateec(

Sensors 201

allowed theoscillated bedeparture tooscillating cwere taken at would hav

Figureof n-dcontrowere with 0metabounique

4. Future of

With thedemonstratiowill most libackground.he limiting

Frp protein, ncreases in

production, cytotoxicityuciferase, t

system contoptimized asystem and g

Separate autonomousechnologies

expressing tcircuit transBBICs), can

2, 12

investigatoetween a sigo significantchanges highat set time pve been poss

e 9. While tdecanal at anol cells (red

significantl0.01% n-deolism of cee, autonomo

f lux Imagi

e extensive on in eukarikely revol. Close et areagent in twhich redu

n the availabhowever,

. It is also ithe eukaryotinues to be

and biolumigive it a brofrom the

s nature alres. In severathe full luxsducers. Then provide fo

ors to visugnificant detly reduced hlights the

points rathersible to com

treatment ofnd above 0boxes) and ly diminishecanal provells in real ous nature o

ing

use of luryotes, the mve around

al. [7] have the lux reac

uces FMN tobility of thenot to as gimportant tootic-optimize used andnescent out

oader appeabiological

eady presental instances,x cassette onese miniatuor the detec

ualize a 3.5ecline and tbioluminesutility of thr than the ne

mpletely om

f constitutiv.001% did all time poi

hed in biolided the optime. This

of the lux re

ux as a biomajority of

its furtherreported tha

ction in humo FMNH2, ce aldehyde cgreat an exo note that, ed lux syst

d is exposetput can be

al than it hasmodificatio

ts unique op, investigatonto small f

urized devicction of the b

5 h period the negativscent produche autonomoear continuo

mit this perio

vely bioluminot show aints surveyeluminescenpportunity ttype of an

action. Use

oreporter indevelopmenoptimizati

at the availaman cells, ancould lead toco-substratextent and cunlike alter

tem has onld to a wid

e improved.s currently.ons that copportunitiesors lead by footprint (~ces, called bbioreporter

where the e control vction (Figurous lux systous monitor

od of activit

inescent humany significaed from cellnt productioto view ch

nalysis is md with perm

n bacteria, nt that remaon and expability of thnd increaseso bioluminee were alsocame with rnate reportly recently

der variety This woul

ould be ens for merginSayler et a

~1 cm3), lowbioluminescoptical sign

bioluminesvalue, followre 9) [77]. Ttem, becausring performty from the r

man cells want differenls treated wion (green hanges in cmade possibmission from

and the reains for thispansion in he FMNH2 cs in the efficescent increao shown to e

possible cter systems

become avof investigld enhance

ngineered inng it directlyal. [81–83] hw power (3cent biorepnal, the dist

scent outpuwed by a fiThe monitose if individmed in the iresultant da

with concentnce from unith 0.1% n-dboxes), treellular heal

ble because m [77].

ecent proofs unique rep

the eukaryco-substrateciency of exases as largeenhance biooncerns ovsuch as GF

vailable forgators, it ca

the usabilit

nto the luxy with existhave integr

3.3 milliwatporter integrtinguishing

74

ut from celnal, constan

oring of thesdual readinginvestigationata.

trations ntreated decanal eatment lth and of the

f-in-principporter systemyotic cellulae is currentlxpressing the as 151-foldoluminescenver increaseFP and fireflr use. As than be furthety of the lu

x system, iing detectio

rated bactertt) integraterated circuiof this sign

45

lls nt se gs n,

al m ar ly he d. nt ed fly he er ux

its on ia ed its al

Sensors 2012, 12 746

from noise, the digital processing of the signal, and local communication of the result within a single, self contained package (Figure 10).

Figure 10. Despite its small size, the BBIC chip contains all of the necessary circuitry for the detection and reporting of bioluminescent cells. By imaging directly on the chip prior to photons passing through host tissue, signal collection will be greatly simplified. Used with permission from [84].

When bioluminescent bacterial cells are interfaced to the BBIC, as few as 5,000 can be detected and distinguished from background [81] and it is sensitive enough to differentiate bioluminescent output levels stemming from changes in the concentration of the exposed stimulating analyte [81,82]. These devices could be paired with lux-expressing eukaryotic cells and then implanted into small animal models for direct internal imaging of reporter signals without the need to anesthetize or remove the animal from its natural habitat, offering unparalleled opportunities for studying changes in physiology and compound bioavailability under a wide range of conditions. Similarly, these cells could be complexed with microcircuitry capable of initiating hormone or therapeutic compound dosage. In this fashion, the lux-expressing cells could be programed to continuously monitor the body for specific target compounds, acting as real-time biosentinels that detect changes in physiology and whose resultant changes in bioluminescent output could trigger the release of counteractive compounds. This would allow the development of fully autonomous, implantable dose/response therapeutic devices.

5. Conclusions

While the use of bacterial bioluminescence as a reporter system has been employed for quite a long time, it is still a continually developing reporter system. There are many examples from the recent literature that demonstrate new and creative lux-based bacterial biosensors that are employed for myriad sensing applications, and there are also recent examples showing how modification of these genes has expanded their usage to new applications that were previously thought impossible. The unique ability of the lux system to produce a bioluminescent signal without exogenous substrate input has ensured that it will continue to find use in basic and applied scientific research for years to come. Whether or not it continues to be improved for function in eukaryotic cells may well decide the true extent of lux usage in the future, however, for the time being it remains both an interesting and practical example of the benefits available from an optical reporter system.

Sensors 2012, 12 747

Acknowledgements

Portions of this review reflecting work by the authors was supported by the the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Cancer Imaging Program, award number CA127745-01, the University of Tennessee Research Foundation Technology Maturation Funding program, National Science Foundation Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems (CBET) under award number CBET-0853780, and the Army Defense University Research Instrumentation Program.

References

1. Close, D.M.; Ripp, S.; Sayler, G.S. Reporter proteins in whole-cell optical bioreporter detection systems, biosensor integrations, and biosensing applications. Sensors 2009, 9, 9147–9174.

2. McElroy, W.; Hastings, J.; Sonnenfeld, V.; Coulombre, J. The requirement of riboflavin phosphate for bacterial luminescence. Science 1953, 118, 385–386.

3. Strehler, B.; Harvey, E.; Chang, J.; Cormier, M. The luminescent oxidation of reduced riboflavin or reduced riboflavin phosphate in the bacterial luciferin-luciferase reaction. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1954, 40, 10–12.

4. Belas, R.; Mileham, A.; Cohn, D.; Hilmen, M.; Simon, M.; Silverman, M. Bacterial bioluminescence: Isolation and expression of the luciferase genes from Vibrio harveyi. Science 1982, 218, 791–793.

5. Gupta, R.K.; Patterson, S.S.; Ripp, S.; Sayler, G.S. Expression of the Photorhabdus luminescens lux genes (luxA, B, C, D, and E) in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. FEMS Yeast Res. 2003, 4, 305–313.

6. Patterson, S.S.; Dionisi, H.M.; Gupta, R.K.; Sayler, G.S. Codon optimization of bacterial luciferase (lux) for expression in mammalian cells. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2005, 32, 115–123.

7. Close, D.M.; Patterson, S.S.; Ripp, S.; Baek, S.J.; Sanseverino, J.; Sayler, G.S. Autonomous bioluminescent expression of the bacterial luciferase gene cassette (lux) in a mammalian cell line. PLoS One 2010, 5, e12441.

8. Nealson, K.H.; Hastings, J. Bacterial bioluminescence: Its control and ecological significance. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 1979, 43, 496–518.

9. Meighen, E.A. Molecular biology of bacterial bioluminescence. Microbiol. Rev. 1991, 55, 123–142. 10. Swartzman, E.; Silverman, M.; Meighen, E. The luxR gene product of Vibrio harveyi is a

transcriptional activator of the lux promoter. J. Bacteriol. 1992, 174, 7490–7493. 11. Engebrecht, J.; Nealson, K.; Silverman, M. Bacterial bioluminescence: Isolation and genetic

analysis of functions from Vibrio fischeri. Cell 1983, 32, 773–781. 12. Fernandezpinas, F.; Wolk, C. Expression of luxCD-E in Anabeaena sp. can replace the use of

exogenous aldehyde for in vivo localization of transcription by luxAB. Gene 1994, 150, 169–174. 13. Frackman, S.; Anhalt, M.; Nealson, K. Cloning, organization, and expression of the bioluminescence

genes of Xenorhabdus luminescens. J. Bacteriol. 1990, 172, 5767–5773. 14. Engebrecht, J.; Simon, M.; Silverman, M. Measuring gene expression with light. Science 1985,

227, 1345–1347. 15. Belas, R.; Simon, M.; Silverman, M. Regulation of lateral flagella gene transcription in

Vibrio parahaemolyticus. J. Bacteriol. 1986, 167, 210–218.

Sensors 2012, 12 748

16. Shaw, J.J.; Kado, C.I. Development of a Vibrio bioluminescence gene set to monitor phytopathogenic bacteria during the ongoing disease process in a nondisruptive manner. Nat. Biotechnol. 1986, 4, 560–564.

17. de Weger, L.; Dunbar, P.; Mahafee, F.; Lugtenberg, B.; Sayler, G. Use of bioluminescence markers to detect Pseudomonas spp. in the rhizosphere. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1991, 57, 3641–3644.

18. Ripp, S.; Nivens, D.E.; Ahn, Y.; Werner, C.; Jarrell, J.; Easter, J.P.; Cox, C.D.; Burlage, R.S.; Sayler, G.S. Controlled field release of a bioluminescent genetically engineered microorganism for bioremediation process monitoring and control. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000, 34, 846–853.

19. King, J.M.H.; Digrazia, P.M.; Applegate, B.; Burlage, R.; Sanseverino, J.; Dunbar, P.; Larimer, F.; Sayler, G.S. Rapid, sensitive bioluminescent reporter technology for naphthalene exposure and biodegradation. Science 1990, 249, 778–781.

20. Burlage, R.S.; Sayler, G.S.; Larimer, F. Monitoring of naphthalene catabolism by bioluminescence with nah-lux transcriptional fusions. J. Bacteriol. 1990, 172, 4749–4757.

21. Applegate, B.M.; Kehrmeyer, S.R.; Sayler, G.S. A chromosomally based tod-luxCDABE whole-cell reporter for benzene, toluene, ethybenzene, and xylene (BTEX) sensing. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 2730–2735.

22. Abd-El-Haleem, D.; Ripp, S.; Scott, C.; Sayler, G.S. A luxCDABE-based bioluminescent bioreporter for the detection of phenol. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2002, 29, 233–237.

23. Davidov, Y.; Rozen, R.; Smulski, D.R.; Van Dyk, T.K.; Vollmer, A.C.; Elsemore, D.A.; LaRossa, R.A.; Belkin, S. Improved bacterial SOS promoter::lux fusions for genotoxicity detection. Mutat. Res. 2000, 466, 97–107.

24. Belkin, S.; Gu, M. Whole Cell Sensing Systems II: Applications; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 2010.

25. Ripp, S.; Layton, A.C.; Sayler, G.S. The microbe as a reporter: Microbial bioreporter sensing technologies for chemical and biological detection. In Environmental Microbiology: Current Technology and Water Applications; Sen, K., Ashbolt, N.J., Eds.; Caister Academic Press: Norfolk, UK, 2011; pp. 281–305.

26. Hay, A.G.; Rice, J.F.; Applegate, B.M.; Bright, N.G.; Sayler, G.S. A bioluminescent whole-cell reporter for detection of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid and 2,4-dichlorophenol in soil. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2000, 66, 4589–4594.

27. Toba, F.A.; Hay, A.G. A simple solid phase assay for the detection of 2,4-D in soil. J. Microbiol. Methods 2005, 62, 135–143.

28. Burlage, R.S. Organic contaminant detection and biodegradation characteristics. In Methods in Molecular Biology/Bioluminescence; LaRossa, R., Ed.; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 259–268.

29. Rozen, Y.; Nejidat, A.; Gartemann, K.H.; Belkin, S. Specific detection of p-chlorobenzoic acid by Escherichia coli bearing a plasmid-borne fcbA'::lux fusion. Chemosphere 1999, 38, 633–641.

30. Wallace, W.H.; Fleming, J.T.; White, D.C.; Sayler, G.S. An algD-lux bioluminescent reporter plasmid to monitor alginate production in biofilms. Microb. Ecol. 1994, 27, 225–239.

Sensors 2012, 12 749

31. Simpson, M.L.; Paulus, M.J.; Jellison, G.E.; Sayler, G.S.; Nivens, D.E.; Dionisi, H.M.; Ripp, S.; Applegate, B.; Patterson, G.; Bolton, E.; et al. Bioluminescent bioreporter integrated circuits (BBICs): Whole-cell environmental monitoring devices. In Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Environmental Systems (Society of Automotive Engineers), Toulouse, France, 10–13 July 2000.

32. Eldridge, M.L.; Sanseverino, J.; Layton, A.C.; Easter, J.P.; Schultz, T.W.; Sayler, G.S. Saccharomyces cerevisiae BLYAS, a new bioluminescent bioreporter for detection of androgenic compounds. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2007, 73, 6012–6018.

33. Francis, K.P.; Joh, D.; Bellinger-Kawahara, C.; Hawkinson, M.J.; Purchio, T.F.; Contag, P.R. Monitoring bioluminescent Staphylococcus aureus infections in mice using a novel luxABCDE construct. Infect. Immun. 2000, 68, 3594–3600.

34. Flynn, H.C.; Meharg, A.A.; Bowyer, P.K.; Paton, G.I. Antimony bioavailability in mine soils. Environ. Pollut. 2003, 124, 93–100.

35. Ivask, A.; Green, T.; Polyak, B.; Mor, A.; Kahru, A.; Virta, M.; Marks, R. Fibre-optic bacterial biosensors and their application for the analysis of bioavailable Hg and As in soils and sediments from Aznalcollar mining area in Spain. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2007, 22, 1396–1402.

36. Corbisier, P.; Thiry, E.; Diels, L. Bacterial biosensors for the toxicity assessment of solid waste. Environ. Toxicol. Water Qual. 1996, 11, 171–177.

37. Peitzsch, N.; Eberz, G.; Nies, D.H. Alcaligenes eutrophus as a bacterial chromate sensor. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 453–458.

38. Tibazarwa, C.; Wuertz, S.; Mergeay, M.; Wyns, L.; van der Lelie, D. Regulation of the cnr cobalt and nickel resistance determinant of Ralstonia eutropha (Alcaligenes eutrophus) CH34. J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182, 1399–1409.

39. Riether, K.B.; Dollard, M.A.; Billard, P. Assessment of heavy metal bioavailability using Escherichia coli zntAp::lux and copAp::lux based biosensors. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2001, 57, 712–716.

40. Lopes, N.; Hawkins, S.; Jegier, P.; Menn, F.-M.; Sayler, G.; Ripp, S. Detection of dichloromethane with a bioluminescent (lux) bacterial bioreporter. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2012, 39, 45–53.

41. Belkin, S.; Smulski, D.R.; Dadon, S.; Vollmer, A.C.; Van Dyk, T.K.; LaRossa, R.A. A panel of stress-responsive luminous bacteria for the detection of selected classes of toxicants. Wat. Res. 1997, 31, 3009–3016.

42. Vollmer, A.C.; Belkin, S.; Smulski, D.R.; Van Dyk, T.K.; LaRossa, R.A. Detection of DNA damage by use of Escherichia coli carrying recA'-lux, uvrA'-lux, or alkA'-lux reporter plasmids. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1997, 63, 2566–2571.

43. Hwang, E.T.; Ahn, J.M.; Kim, B.C.; Gu, M.B. Construction of a nrdA::luxCDABE fusion and its use in Escherichia coli as a DNA damage biosensor. Sensors 2008, 8, 1297–1307.

44. van Dyk, T.K.; DeRose, E.J.; Gonye, G.E. LuxArray, a high-density, genomewide transcription analysis of Escherichia coli using bioluminescent reporter strains. J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183, 5496–5505.

Sensors 2012, 12 750

45. Sanseverino, J.; Gupta, R.K.; Layton, A.C.; Patterson, S.S.; Ripp, S.A.; Saidak, L.; Simpson, M.L.; Schultz, T.W.; Sayler, G.S. Use of Saccharomyces cerevisiae BLYES expressing bacterial bioluminescence for rapid, sensitive detection of estrogenic compounds. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 4455–4460.

46. Min, J.; Lee, C.W.; Moon, S.H.; LaRossa, R.A.; Gu, M.B. Detection of radiation effects using recombinant bioluminescent Escherichia coli strains. Radiat. Environ. Biophys. 2000, 39, 41–45.

47. Rupani, S.P.; Gu, M.B.; Konstantinov, K.B.; Dhurjati, P.S.; Van Dyk, T.K.; Larossa, R.A. Characterization of the stress response of a bioluminescent biological sensor in batch and continuous cultures. Biotechnol. Prog. 1996, 12, 387–392.

48. van Dyk, T.K.; Reed, T.R.; Vollmer, A.C.; LaRossa, R.A. Synergistic induction of the heat shock response in Escherichia coli by simultaneous treatment with chemical inducers. J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 6001–6004.

49. Jouanneau, S.; Durand, M.J.; Courcoux, P.; Blusseau, T.; Thouand, G. Improvement of the identification of four heavy metals in environmental samples by using predictive decision tree models coupled with a set of five bioluminescent bacteria. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 2925–2931.

50. Bang, Y.B.; Lee, S.E.; Rhee, J.H.; Choi, S.H. Evidence that expression of the Vibrio vulnificus hemolysin gene is dependent on cyclic AMP and cyclic AMP receptor protein. J. Bacteriol. 1999, 181, 7639–7642.

51. Belkin, S.; Smulski, D.R.; Vollmer, A.C.; Van Dyk, T.K.; LaRossa, R.A. Oxidative stress detection with Escherichia coli harboring a katG'::lux fusion. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1996, 62, 2252–2256.

52. Contag, C.H.; Contag, P.R.; Mullins, J.I.; Spilman, S.D.; Stevenson, D.K.; Benaron, D.A. Photonic detection of bacterial pathogens in living hosts. Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 18, 593–603.

53. Khang, Y.H.; Yang, Z.K.; Burlage, R.S. Measurement of iron-dependence of pupA promoter activity by a pup-lux bioreporter. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1997, 7, 352–355.

54. Selifonova, O.V.; Eaton, R.W. Use of an ipb-lux fusion to study regulation of the isopropylbenzene catabolism operon of Pseudomonas putida RE204 and to detect hydrophobic pollutants in the environment. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1996, 62, 778–783.

55. Magrisso, S.; Belkin, S.; Erel, Y. Lead bioavailability in soil and soil components. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2009, 202, 315–323.

56. Larose, C.; Dommergue, A.; Marusczak, N.; Coves, J.; Ferrari, C.P.; Schneider, D. Bioavailable mercury cycling in polar snowpacks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 2150–2156.

57. Yan, L.; Allen, M.S.; Simpson, M.L.; Sayler, G.S.; Cox, C.D. Direct quantification of N-(3-oxo-hexanoyl)-L-homoserine lactone in culture supernatant using a whole-cell bioreporter. J. Microbiol. Methods 2007, 68, 40–45.

58. Heitzer, A.; Webb, O.F.; Thonnard, J.E.; Sayler, G.S. Specific and quantitative assessment of naphthalene and salicylate bioavailability by using a bioluminescent catabolic reporter bacterium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1992, 58, 1839–1846.

59. Everhart, J.L.; McNear, D.; Peltier, E.; van der Lelie, D.; Chaney, R.L.; Sparks, D.L. Assessing nickel bioavailability in smelter-contaminated soils. Sci. Total Environ. 2006, 367, 732–744.

Sensors 2012, 12 751

60. Abd-El-Haleem, D.; Ripp, S.; Zaki, S.; Sayler, G.S. Detection of nitrate/nitrite bioavailability in wastewater using a luxCDABE-based Klebsiella oxytoca bioluminescent bioreporter. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2007, 17, 1254–1261.

61. Lee, H.J.; Gu, M.B. Construction of a sodA::luxCDABE fusion Escherichia coli: Comparison with a katG fusion strain through their responses to oxidative stresses. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2003, 60, 577–580.

62. Layton, A.C.; Muccini, M.; Ghosh, M.M.; Sayler, G.S. Construction of a bioluminescent reporter strain to detect polychlorinated biphenyls. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 5023–5026.

63. Ripp, S.; Applegate, B.; Nivens, D.E.; Simpson, M.L.; Sayler, G.S. Advances in whole-cell bioluminescent bioreporters for environmental monitoring and chemical sensing. In Proceedings of the AIChE Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 12–17 November 2000.

64. Shimizu, T.; Ohta, Y.; Tsutsuki, H.; Noda, M. Construction of a novel bioluminescent reporter system for investigating Shiga toxin expression of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli. Gene 2011, 478, 1–10.

65. Hansen, L.H.; Sorensen, S.J. Detection and quantification of tetracyclines by whole cell biosensors. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2000, 190, 273–278.

66. Elad, T.; Benovich, E.; Magrisso, S.; Belkin, S. Toxicant identification by a luminescent bacterial bioreporter panel: Application of pattern classification algorithms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 8486–8491.

67. Elad, T.; Lee, J.H.; Gu, M.B.; Belkin, S. Microbial cell arrays. In Whole Cell Sensing Systems I: Reporter Cells and Devices; Belkin, S., Gu, M.B., Eds.; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2010; Volume 117, pp. 85–108.

68. Shingleton, J.T.; Applegate, B.M.; Nagel, A.C.; Bienkowski, P.R.; Sayler, G.S. Induction of the tod operon by trichloroethylene in Pseudomonas putida TVA8. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 5049–5052.

69. Burlage, R.S.; Patek, D.R.; Everman, K.R. Method for Detection of Buried Explosives Using a Biosensor. U.S. Patent 5,972,638, October 1999.

70. Vollmer, A.C.; Kwakye, S.; Halpern, M.; Everbach, E.C. Bacterial stress response to 1-megahertz pulsed ultrasound in the presence of microbubbles. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 3927–3931.

71. Elasri, M.O.; Miller, R.V. A Pseudomonas aeruginosa biosensor responds to exposure to ultraviolet radiation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 1998, 50, 455–458.

72. Bakhrat, A.; Eltzov, E.; Finkelstein, Y.; Marks, R.S.; Raveh, D. UV and arsenate toxicity: A specific and sensitive yeast bioluminescence assay. Cell Biol. Toxicol. 2011, 27, 227–236.

73. Erbe, J.L.; Adams, A.C.; Taylor, K.B.; Hall, L.M. Cyanobacteria carrying an smt-lux transcriptional fusion as biosensors for the detection of heavy metal cations. J. Ind. Microbiol. 1996, 17, 80–83.

74. Almashanu, S.; Musafia, B.; Hadar, R.; Suissa, M.; Kuhn, J. Fusion of luxA and luxB and its expression in Escherichia coli, Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Drosophila melanogaster. J. Biolumin. Chemilumin. 1990, 5, 89–97.

75. Kirchner, G.; Roberts, J.L.; Gustafson, G.D.; Ingolia, T.D. Active bacterial luciferase from a fused gene: Expression of a Vibrio harveyi luxAB translational fusion in bacteria, yeast and plant cells. Gene 1989, 81, 349–354.

Sensors 2012, 12 752

76. Olsson, O.; Koncz, C.; Szalay, A.A. The use of the luxA gene of the bacterial luciferase operon as a reporter gene. Mol. Gen. Genet. 1988, 215, 1–9.

77. Close, D.; Hahn, R.; Ripp, S.; Sayler, G.S. Determining toxicant bioavailability using a constitutively bioluminescent human cell line. In Proceedings for the 3rd Annual Biomedical Science and Engineering Conference, Oak Rige, TN, USA, 15–17 March 2011.

78. Close, D.M.; Hahn, R.; Patterson, S.S.; Ripp, S.; Sayler, G.S. Comparison of human optimized bacterial luciferase, firefly luciferase, and green fluorescent protein for continuous imaging of cell culture and animal models. J. Biomed. Opt. 2011, 16, e12441.

79. Craney, A.; Hohenauer, T.; Xu, Y.; Navani, N.K.; Li, Y.F.; Nodwell, J. A synthetic luxCDABE gene cluster optimized for expression in high-GC bacteria. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007, doi: 10.1093/nar/gkm086.

80. Yagur-Kroll, S.; Belkin, S. Upgrading bioluminescent bacterial bioreporter performance by splitting the lux operon. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2011, 400, 1071–1082.

81. Nivens, D.E.; McKnight, T.E.; Moser, S.A.; Osbourn, S.J.; Simpson, M.L.; Sayler, G.S. Bioluminescent bioreporter integrated circuits: Potentially small, rugged and inexpensive whole-cell biosensors for remote environmental monitoring. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2004, 96, 33–46.

82. Ripp, S.; DiClaudio, M.; Sayler, G. Biosensors as environmental monitors. In Environmental Microbiology, 2nd ed.; Mitchell, R., Gu, J., Eds.; Wiley-Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; pp. 213–233.

83. Vijayaraghavan, R.; Islam, S.; Zhang, M.; Ripp, S.; Caylor, S.; Bull, N.D.; Moser, S.; Terry, S.; Blalock, B.; Sayler, G. A bioreporter bioluminescent integrated circuit for very low-level chemical sensing in both gas and liquid environments. Sens. Actuat. B-Chem. 2007, 123, 922–928.

84. Simpson, M.L.; Sayler, G.S.; Applegate, B.M.; Ripp, S.; Nivens, D.E.; Paulus, M.J.; Jellison, G.E. Bioluminescent-bioreporter integrated circuits form novel whole-cell biosensors. Trends Biotechnol. 1998, 16, 332–338.

© 2012 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).